It’s hard to take a reality TV star whose name sounds like a brand of salsa seriously, but that’s exactly what people are doing with comments made by The Bachelor‘s Juan Pablo Galavis to the TV Page.

The former Venezuelan soccer star said Friday night that he would be 100 percent opposed to having a cycle of the reality dating show feature an openly gay or bisexual bachelor.

“I don’t think it is a good example for kids to watch that on TV,” he told me.

“Obviously people have their husband and wife and kids and that is how we are brought up. Now there is fathers having kids and all that, and it is hard for me to understand that too in the sense of a household having peoples…Two parents sleeping in the same bed and the kid going into bed…It is confusing in a sense. But I respect them because they want to have kids. They want to be parents. So it is a scale…Where do you put it on the scale? Where is the thin line to cross or not? You have to respect everybody’s desires and way of living. But it would be too hard for TV.” (Via)

Galavis continued his homophobic remarks, accusing gay people of being “more pervert in a sense.” He attempted to soften the blow by explaining that he has many gay friends. (Via)

Juan Pablo Galavis TOTALLY respects gay people — he just doesn’t want to see them on TV. That makes sense. I mean, if kids grew up watching people they didn’t respect on TV, they’d grow up into future reality TV hacks.

I disagree Dissident, true or false, everyone’s entitled to their opinion. To say otherwise is to be close minded and in direct opposition to what those of the LGBT community hold most dear, to just be themselves and not be judged for it.

Or “big boobs are wrong” isn’t an opinion. It’s a judgment. Much like “being gay is wrong” or “I don’t agree with the gay lifestyle” is a judgment, but people who are members of one specific religion know they aren’t supposed to judge so they insist it’s not a judgment. It’s an “opinion”.

Not to put words in Pepe’s mouth, but I think the expression he’s trying to convey in garbled English is not (necessarily) that homosexuality is wrong, or immoral, or he hates it (one might even argue he makes a case that he feels the opposite). But rather that he doesn’t want to watch a dating program about homosexuals courting on television, in part because he feels it sends the wrong message and might be confusing to younger viewers who aren’t emotionally/mentally equipped to understand that dynamic of non-traditional/biological partnerships at their young age. To generalize and call these statements “homophobic” might be a stretch, since he’s not advocating rounding up gays or eliminating homosexuality from the culture, just marking his opinion/preference that it’s not something he wants to watch on TV.

Full disclosure- I think he’s right. NONE of this sh*t should be on TV, gay, straight, bi, ponies, whatever. How do people watch this, still?

Children are only “confused” by gays if they aren’t exposed to them due to their parents’ homophobia.

You tell a kid “some guys date guys” and they will completely understand and then move on to something else.

So yes, it is homophobic to suggest seeing homosexuals would be confusing to children because you’re saying you need to “protect” children from something that wouldn’t be the least bit confusing to them but for their parents’ or community’s reinforcement of it being wrong.

He is right all fagggots are sick vile child molesters.they are hated in all societies.these rotten scourge of the earth pedaphiles.The truth hurts that they are nasty sexual deviants and will never be accepted for there sick vile ways.

“Faggot” only has two g’s ggenius. And you spelled “pedophile” wrong. There are two spaces after each period, (assuming of course that after the period the next sentence has bathed in a special house), and traditionally the first letter of the first word in every sentence is capitalized. There is also such a thing as a comma in the English language. They are used frequently to break up a sentence that would otherwise run on too long, but has a point you don’t want to make in two different sentences, such as this one.

Why don’t you read a couple of books that weren’t written 4,000 years ago when the authors were afraid of lightning, frogs and dragons, and perhaps look at a couple of books on grammar, and then get back to us.

You’ll still be a raving loon but at least you’ll be a legible raving loon.

I was taught that in typing class way back in high school. That was 25-30 years ago. My kids tell me that is no longer the case, but I cling to what I was taught. It’s the same reason I’m afraid of black people.

I hate to agree with Bawk, but yea, there’s generally only supposed to be one space after a period. The rule is somewhat flexible outside of the world of print journalism. I’m an editor at a large, regional newspaper, and you never want to waste precious space. The AP Style always rules in favor of doing what uses the least amount of space. Copy editors freak out if there are two spaces after a period. I actually had a few journalism professors that would dock us a letter grade for extra spaces.

You will get my two spaces after a period when you pry them, and lowcal’s frisbee, from my cold dead hands.

I love how this thread on proper grammar has evolved out of thread on homophobia. Anyway it appears both sides have merit to their positions. I learned about spacing 25-30 years ago and somewhere over the ensuing time it’s become an anachronism and no one told people like me and dissident. I think it looks better so i’ma stick with it.

I still stand by my initial position that “faggot” only has two g’s in it. And that Jed Clampett up there is a raving loon.